Treatment of beverages to reduce the effects of noxious constituents

ABSTRACT

A method of treating an beverage, comprising exposing a beverage to an ion exchange matrix that includes a mixture of cation exchange beads and anion exchange beads each capable of binding to one or more cationic or anionic constituents present in the beverage and thereby reduce concentrations of the one or more cationic or anionic constituents in the beverage and capable of maintaining a pH of the beverage within ±0.5 pH units of the beverage&#39;s pretreatment pH value. The cationic or anionic constituents have a noxious effect on humans and the cation exchange beads include a cationic mineral form and the anion exchange beads include a chloride mineral form.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

The present application is a division of U.S. patent application Ser.No. 14/610,203, filed Jan. 30, 2015 and entitled “TREATMENT OF BEVERAGESTO REDUCE THE EFFECTS OF NOXIOUS CONSTITUENTS,” which is a bypasscontinuation application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) (see e.g., Fed.Reg., Vol. 76, No. 185, page 59052 column 1, lines 30-36) ofinternational application PCT/US2014/048451, filed Jul. 28, 2014 andentitled “TREATMENT OF BEVERAGES TO REDUCE THE EFFECTS OF NOXIOUSCONSTITUENTS,” which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional ApplicationNo. 61/859,373, filed Jul. 29, 2013 and entitled “TREATMENT OF BEVERAGESTO REDUCE THE EFFECTS OF NOXIOUS CONSTITUENTS,” the disclosures of whichare all incorporated by reference herein in their entirety.

TECHNICAL FIELD

This application is directed, in general, to the treatment of beverages,more specifically, to treating beverages to reduce the effects ofnoxious constituents present in beverages and to apparatuses tofacilitate such treatments and the treated beverages.

BACKGROUND

A large segment of the population currently consumes beverages. However,in certain segments of the population, consuming beverages can producenegative symptoms. Such negative symptoms can include facial flush,nasal congestion, voice change, headache and/or allergy symptoms, and insome cases, an extreme allergic reaction resulting in death.

The noxious constituents causing these symptoms, however, can benaturally occurring endogenous byproducts, and, can play a beneficialrole in the fermentation process to produce certain beverages, such ascertain alcoholic beverages. For instance, sulfites can cause asthma andallergies, but, sulfites are naturally occurring byproducts of yeastfermentation and helps delay spoilage of the beverage. Histamines,another naturally occurring fermentation byproduct, trigger headaches insome people (e.g., with diamine oxidase deficiency). Tyramine can causean increase in blood pressure, which triggers headaches in some people,and, tyramine is another fermentation byproduct. Tannins may trigger therelease of serotonin, which can cause headaches in some people, and,tannins are components of the wood containers in which beverages can befermented and stored.

Consequently, because they are naturally occurring, and in some cases,beneficial, it can be undesirable to remove or prevent the formation ofsuch noxious constituents during the fermentation process and subsequentstorage of beverages. Alternatively, the removal of such noxiousconstituents from the final beverage product, e.g., just prior toconsumption, can have adverse effects on the quality of the beverage.Non-limiting examples of such adverse effects include undesirablechanges to the taste, aroma, or color of the beverage, such as wine.

Accordingly, what is needed in the art is a simplified consumer-friendlytreatment of beverages to reduce the effects of noxious constituentsthat does not suffer from the disadvantages associated with theconventional treatments discussed above.

SUMMARY

To address the above-discussed deficiencies, one embodiment is a methodof treating a beverage. The method comprises exposing a beverage to anion exchange matrix that includes a mixture of cation exchange beads andanion exchange beads each capable of binding to one or more cationic oranionic constituents present in the beverage and thereby reduceconcentrations of the one or more cationic or anionic constituents inthe beverage and capable of maintaining a pH of the beverage within ±0.5pH units of the beverage's pretreatment pH value, wherein the cationicor anionic constituents have a noxious effect on humans and the cationexchange beads include a cationic mineral form and the anion exchangebeads include a chloride mineral form.

In any such embodiments the cation exchange beads can be capable ofbinding cationic noxious constituents that include histamines, and, theanion exchange beads can be capable of binding anionic noxiousconstituents that include sulfites. Any such embodiments can furtherinclude the cation exchange beads in a hydrogen form, and, the anionexchange beads in a hydroxide form. Any such embodiments can also thecationic mineral form including one or more of potassium, calcium,magnesium, iron or copper mineral forms, and, the anionic mineral formincluding a in the chloride form. In any such embodiments the anionicexchange beads are in the chloride form and include trimethylaminefunctional groups, and, the cation exchange beads are in a cationicmineral form that include one or more of potassium, calcium, magnesium,iron or copper mineral forms and include sulfonic acid functionalgroups. In any such embodiments the mixture of cation exchange beads andthe anion exchange beads are capable of maintaining a conductivity ofthe beverage equal to or greater than the beverage's pretreatmentconductivity value. In any such embodiments the ion exchange matrix caninclude anti-allergenic ingredient bound thereto, the anti-allergenicingredient being released from the ion exchange matrix when the beverageis exposed to the ion exchange matrix.

Another embodiment is an apparatus for treating beverages. The apparatuscomprises a container that holds an ion exchange matrix therein. Atleast part of the container includes a screen that prevents the passageof ion exchange matrix there-through and permits the passage of abeverage there-through, wherein the ion exchange matrix includes amixture of cation exchange beads and anion exchange beads. The ionexchange matrix includes a mixture of cation exchange beads and anionexchange beads each capable of binding to one or more cationic oranionic constituents in the beverage and capable of maintaining a pH ofthe beverage within ±0.5 pH units of the beverage's pretreatment pHvalue, wherein the cationic or anionic constituents have a noxiouseffect on humans and the cation exchange beads include a cationicmineral form and the anion exchange beads include a chloride mineralform.

In some such embodiments the container can be a bag having walls thatinclude the screen, the bag configured to be submerged into a volume ofliquid of the beverage. In some such embodiments the container can be acartridge having an input end with an input opening and an output endwith an output opening, first and second portions of the screen coveringthe input opening and the output opening, respectively. In some suchembodiments the first and second screen portions are held by an inputcap and an output cap, respectively, the caps capable of beingremoveably attached to the cartridge. In some embodiments, the mixtureof cation exchange beads and the anion exchange beads are capable ofmaintaining a conductivity of the beverage equal to or greater than thebeverage's pretreatment conductivity value.

Another embodiment is a beverage. The beverage comprises a treatedvolume of a liquid alcoholic beverage that has been exposed to an ionexchange matrix that includes a mixture of cation exchange beads andanion exchange beads capable of binding one or more noxious ionicconstituents present in the beverage and the cation exchange beadsinclude a cationic mineral form and the anion exchange beads include achloride mineral form. The treated volume of liquid has a total sulfitesconcentration reduced by at least about 25 percent, or, a totalhistamines concentration reduced by at least about 25 percent ascompared to an untreated volume of the liquid alcoholic beverage a pH ofthe beverage is maintained within ±0.5 pH units of the beverage'spretreatment pH value.

In some embodiments the alcoholic beverage can be a wine that was formedin a fermentation process. In some embodiments the alcoholic beverage isa beer that was formed in a fermentation process. In some suchembodiments, the total sulfites concentration in the treated volume ofthe liquid alcoholic beverage is about 300 ppm or less, or, the totalhistamines concentration is about 30 ppm or less. In some suchembodiments, the total sulfites concentration in the treated volume ofthe liquid alcoholic beverage is about 50 ppm or less, or, the totalhistamines concentration is about 10 ppm or less.

In some such embodiments, the noxious ionic constituents include a totaltyramine concentration in the treated volume of the liquid alcoholicbeverage equal to about ppm or less. In some such embodiments, thenoxious ionic constituents include a total tannin concentration in thetreated volume of the liquid alcoholic beverage equal to about 2000 ppmor less.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF FIGURES

For a more complete understanding of the present disclosure, referenceis now made to the following detailed description taken in conjunctionwith the accompanying FIGUREs. It is emphasized that various featuresmay not be drawn to scale. In fact, the dimensions of various featuresmay be arbitrarily increased or reduced for clarity of discussion.Reference is now made to the following descriptions taken in conjunctionwith the accompanying drawings, in which:

FIG. 1 illustrates by flow diagram, selected steps of an example methodof treating a beverage according to the principles of the presentdisclosure;

FIG. 2A presents a cross-sectional view of an example apparatus thepresent disclosure for treating a beverage;

FIG. 2B present a plan view of the example apparatus depicted in FIG. 2Aalong view line 2B-2B;

FIG. 3 presents a cross-sectional view of another example apparatus thepresent disclosure for treating a beverage;

FIG. 4 presents free SO₂ results of wine treated with ion exchangematrix as disclosed in Experiment 1;

FIG. 5 presents results of employing a 0.02% K₂S₂O₅ solution as asulphite solution to evaluate the beads capacity towards sulphite asdisclosed in Experiment 1;

FIG. 6 presents results of examining the influence of stirring time onSO₂ content as disclosed in Experiment 2;

FIG. 7 presents results of examining the removal of SO₂ by flowingthrough a column as disclosed in Experiment 2;

FIG. 8 presents results of removal of SO₂ in wine by satchel packed withion exchange matrix with various soaking time as disclosed in Experiment2;

FIG. 9 presents results of removal of free SO₂ and total SO₂ contents ofuntreated wine and wine treated by four different methods as disclosedin Experiment 2;

FIGS. 10A and 10A presents results of removal of free SO₂ from wine Clanion exchange resin beads and H/OH mixed ion exchange resin beads withstirring using different resin bead amounts, as disclosed in Experiment3;

FIG. 11 presents results showing the influence of ion exchange resins onfree and total SO2 contents in wine (a) and conductivity and pH of wine(b), as disclosed in Experiment 4;

FIG. 12 presents results showing the removal of SO₂ in K₂S₂O₅ solutionwith mixed bed ion exchange resins, as disclosed in Experiment 4;

FIG. 13 presents results showing the effect of mixing time on SO₂content, pH and conductivity of wine, as disclosed in Experiment 4;

FIG. 14 presents results showing the removal of SO₂ in wine by theflowing through column method, as disclosed in Experiment 4;

FIG. 15 presents results showing the removal of SO₂ in wine by thesatchel packed method, as disclosed in Experiment 4;

FIG. 16 presents results showing the comparison of Stirring,Non-stirring, Satchel Packed and flow through (funnel & column) methodon SO₂ removal, as disclosed in Experiment 4;

FIG. 17 presents results showing the comparison of effect of anion (Cl)exchange resin amount on wine SO₂ content, conductivity and pH, asdisclosed in Experiment 4;

FIG. 18 presents results showing the effect of cation (Cl) exchangeresin amount on wine SO₂ content, conductivity and pH, as disclosed inExperiment 4; and

FIG. 19 presents result showing the ability of four different ionexchange resins to remove SO₂ from wine, as disclosed in Experiment 4.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Embodiments of the present disclosure benefit from the recognition thatan ion exchange matrix can provide an inexpensive and efficient means toremove noxious constituents from beverages and thereby reduce oreliminate the above-described negative symptoms in certain segments ofthe population. In particular, ion exchange matrixes are effective inthe treatment of beverages after their final production and bottling.Moreover, some embodiments of the ion exchange matrix can be specificfor the removal of one or more of the noxious constituents withoutremoving other constituents, whose removal could adversely affect thequality of the beverage.

A consequence of the recognition that an ion exchange matrix can be usedto treat beverages in removing these noxious constituents is thatseveral properties of the ion exchange bead are newly discoveredresult-effective variables that influence the treatment of beverages, asfurther discussed below. Non-limiting examples of such variablesinclude: the concentration of functional anionic and/or cationicexchanging sites in the ion exchange beads; the binding constant of theexchanging sites in the ion exchange matrix (e.g., weak versus strongcationic and/or anionic binding sites); the rates of mass transferexchange between ionic species bound to ion exchange matrix and ionicspecies of noxious constituents in the beverage; the size and porosityof the ion exchange beads; in some cases, proportions of cationic andanionic exchange beads in mixed bed embodiments of the ion exchangebead; in some cases, the flow rates of the beverage through beds of theion exchange beads.

The term beverage as used herein, refers to alcoholic beverages, or,non-alcoholic beverages, such as fruit or vegetable juices (e.g.,pulp-free or strained juices, in some cases) or teas and coffees. Theterm alcoholic beverage, as used herein, refers to a volume of liquidthat has gone through fermentation process to generate ethanol forconsumption by humans. Non-limiting examples of alcoholic beveragesinclude wines, beers, brandy, whisky, ciders, sprits or other beveragesfermented from grains, grapes, apples or similar plants familiar tothose skilled in the pertinent arts.

The term noxious constituents as used herein, refers to one or more ofsulfites, histamines, tyramines, tannins or similar compounds present inbeverages and known to trigger headaches, facial flushing, asthma orother allergic symptoms, or bitter taste or other undesirable favors,characteristic of drinking the beverages described herein.

The term ion exchange matrix as used herein refers to beads, particles,meshes or other structures whose surfaces contain or are coated with ionexchange groups thereon.

One embodiment is a method of treating a beverage. FIG. 1 illustrates byflow diagram, selected steps of an example method 100 of treating abeverage, according to the principles of the present disclosure.

An advantage of the treatment using ion exchange matrix in accordancewith the method 100 is that, in some cases, no significant change thebeverages′, e.g., an alcoholic beverages′, production and storage isnecessary to implement the method. This is in contrast to certainalternative approaches, such as the use of alternative preservatives toreplace sulfites, using modified yeast strains to produce less sulfitewhile reducing the fermentation temperature, or, using a biocatalyst forremoving sulfites from certain alcoholic beverages, such as wines.

The method 100 comprises a step 105 of exposing the beverage to an ionexchange matrix that binds one or more ionic constituents present in thebeverage and reduces concentrations of the one or more ionicconstituents in the beverage. The ionic constituents have a noxiouseffect on humans. That is, the ionic constituents correspond to one orboth of cationic or anionic forms of the one or more of the noxiousconstituents. For example, in some embodiments, the concentrations ofone or more of the ionic noxious constituents in the treated beverage isreduced by at least about 25 percent, and in some embodiments, at leastabout 50 percent, and in some embodiments, at least about 75 percent ascompared to the concentration of the ionic noxious constituents in theuntreated beverage prior to its exposure to the ion exchange matrix.

In some embodiments, as part of the exposing step 105, in step 110, thebeverage can be poured through an apparatus holding the ion exchangebeads. In other embodiments, as part of step 105, the ion exchangematrix (e.g., held in an apparatus having a screen can, in step 115, besubmerged into a container holding the beverage. Embodiments of suchapparatuses are discussed below in the context of FIGS. 2 and 3.

In some embodiments, the ion exchange matrix includes cation exchangebeads (e.g., provided in step 106), and in such embodiments, cationicnoxious constituents (e.g., histamines) bind to the cation exchangematrix and are thereby reduced in concentration in the beverage.Non-limiting example embodiments of such cation exchange beads includestrong acid cation exchange resin beads in the hydrogen form. In otherembodiments, however, weak acid cation exchange resin beads in thehydrogen form, or, strong or weak cation exchange resin beads in mineralforms (e.g., potassium, calcium, magnesium, iron and/or copper) may beused. In some embodiments, the cation exchange beads can befunctionalized with strong acid groups such as sulfonic acid or othersimilar groups familiar to those skilled in the pertinent arts.

In some embodiments, the ion exchange matrix includes anion exchangebeads (e.g., provided in step 107), and in such embodiments, anionicnoxious constituents (e.g., sulfites) bind to the anion exchange beadsand are thereby reduced in concentration in the beverage. Non-limitingexample embodiments of such anion exchange beads include strong baseanion exchange resin beads in the hydroxide form. In other embodiments,however, strong or weak anion exchange resin beads in mineral forms(e.g., chloride) may be used. In some embodiments, the anion exchangebeads can be functionalized with strong base groups such astrimethylamine ionic form or other similar groups familiar to thoseskilled in the pertinent arts.

In some embodiments, the ion exchange matrix includes a mixture (e.g.,cation and anion exchange beads mixed in step 108 to form the ionexchange matrix) of cation and anion exchange beads (e.g., at leastabout 1 percent by volume of both of the cation and anion exchange beadtypes). Such a mixed ion bed of beads can advantageously remove bothanionic and cationic noxious constituents (e.g., remove both sulfitesand histamines). In some embodiments, for instance, the ion exchangematrix includes a mixture of strong cation and strong anion exchangeresin beads. In some embodiments, such mixed resin beds can beparticularly advantageous at substantially maintaining the pH of thebeverage at its pretreated value. This can be an important aspect ofretaining the flavor and stability profile of certain desirablecomponents in certain beverages, such as wine. For instance, in someembodiments, the pH of the treated beverage is within about ±1, and insome cases, within ±0.5 pH units of the beverage's pretreatment pH. Insome embodiments, to facilitate efficient removal of both anionic andcationic noxious constituents, the ion exchange matrix includes a higherproportion of the anion exchange beads than the cation exchange beads.For example, in some embodiments, the cation exchange beads occupy fromabout 25 to about 40 percent of a total bead volume of the ion exchangematrix and the anion exchange beads occupy a balance of the total beadvolume of the ion exchange matrix (e.g., 75 to 60 percent,respectively). For example, in some embodiments, the cation exchangebeads occupy from about 5 to about 25 percent of a total bead volume ofthe ion exchange matrix and the anion exchange beads occupy a balance ofthe total bead volume of the ion exchange matrix.

In some embodiments to facilitate efficient removal of different ofcationic noxious constituents the ion exchange matrix can include amixture of cation exchange beads that are in a hydrogen form and cationexchange beads that are in a cationic mineral form (e.g., one or more ofthe potassium, calcium, magnesium, iron or copper mineral forms). Insome embodiments, to facilitate efficient removal of anionic noxiousconstituents the ion exchange matrix can include a mixture of anionexchange beads that are in a hydroxide from and anion exchange beadsthat are in one or one of the mineral forms (e.g., a chloride mineralform). In embodiments with a mixture of both cation exchange beads andanion exchange beads to facilitate efficient removal of a broad range ofdifferent cationic and anionic noxious constituents the ion exchangematrix cation exchange beads in a hydrogen form, cation exchange beadsin a cationic mineral form, anion exchange beads in a hydroxide from andanion exchange beads in a mineral form.

In some embodiments, the mixed ion exchange matrix can includesulfonated copolymer of styrene and divinylbenzene functionalized resinsbeads in the hydrogen form (e.g., each bead type in a range from about20 to about 30 percent of the total bead volume) anddimethylaminoethanol functionalized, chloromethylated copolymer ofdivinylbenzene and styrene functionalized resins beads in the hydroxideform (each bead type in a range from about 15 to 30 percent of the ofthe total bead volume). Non-limiting commercially available ion exchangematrix include TM-9 family, including TM-9, TM-9SG and TM-9XRR mixedexchange resins beads (Siemens Industry, Inc. Rockford, Ill.).

In some embodiments, to promote efficient ion exchange and still have ahigh rate flow rates of the beverage through a bed of the ion exchangematrix 210, the ion exchange matrix 210 have an average diameter in arange of 50 to 500 microns, and in some cases, an average diameter in arange of from 200 to 300 microns.

In some embodiments the method 100 can alternatively, or in some casesadditionally, include a step to treat the beverage to reduce thenegative symptoms without removing the noxious constituents. Forinstance, in some embodiments, the method 100 includes a step 120 ofadding one or more anti-allergenic ingredients to the beverage. In someembodiments, the step 120 of adding an anti-allergenic ingredient can beused in combination with the step 105 exposing the beverage to ionexchange matrix to provide additional reduction of allergy likereactions. In some cases, the anti-allergenic ingredients can beinitially bound to the ion exchange resin (e.g., as added in optionalstep 125) and then the anti-allergenic ingredient exchanges with thenoxious constituents during the treatment step 105 to thereby bereleased into the beverage.

Non-limiting examples of anti-allergenic ingredients includeanti-histamines and vasoconstrictors. In some embodiments, theanti-allergenic ingredient can include one or more homeopathicingredients such as ephedra, caffeine (coffee or guarana), quercetin,grape seed extract, pine bark extract, and/or butterbur.

Another embodiment is an apparatus for treating beverages. FIG. 2Apresents a cross-sectional view of an example apparatus 200 the presentdisclosure for treating an beverage. FIG. 2B present a plan view of theexample apparatus depicted in FIG. 2A along view line 2B-2B. FIG. 3presents a cross-sectional view of another example apparatus 200 thepresent disclosure for treating a beverage.

As illustrated in FIGS. 2 and 3, the apparatus 200 comprises a container205 that holds ion exchange matrix 210 therein. At least part of thecontainer 205 includes a screen 215 that prevents the passage of ionexchange matrix 210 there-through and permits the passage of a beverage(e.g., beverage 310, FIG. 2) there-through.

The ionic exchange beads 210 can be any of the embodiments of the anion,cation, or mixed cation and ion bed resins disclosed herein to reduce toconcentration of one or more cationic or anionic noxious constituentsfrom the beverage.

In some embodiments the container 205 can further hold one or moreanti-allergenic ingredients, such as any of the ingredients discussedherein.

Embodiments of the screen 215 can have a mesh size that preventssubstantial quantities of the ionic exchange beads 210 from passingthrough the screen 215, but still allows rapid flow of the beveragethrough the container 205. For instance, in some embodiments, the screen215 can have a mesh size of about 16, and in some cases, about 20, andsome cases, about 50, and in some cases, about 100, and in some cases,about 200. For instance, in some embodiments, the size 217 of openings218 (e.g., diameter or separation distance) in the screen 215 are about0.025 mm, and in some cases, about 0.010 mm, and in some cases, about0.05 mm.

Embodiments of the screen 215 can be composed of metals or metal alloys,such as aluminum or steel, plastics, ceramics, synthetic or naturalfabrics, or other materials familiar to those skilled in the pertinentarts.

Embodiments of the apparatus 200 are versatile and can be utilized inmany different modalities such as bottles, glasses, carafes decantersand aeration devices.

For instance, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the apparatus 200 can have acontainer 205 configured as a cartridge. The screen 215 can includefirst and second screens 215 on the input end 220 and output end 225 ofthe cartridge container 205, respectively.

In some embodiments, the cartridge container 205 can be configured tofit into the neck of a storage bottle holding an beverage, e.g., a winebottle. In some embodiments, as the beverage is poured out of the bottlethrough the cartridge container 205 into a dispensing container, such asa glass, decanter or carafe. In other embodiments, the beverage can bepoured from a bottle into a dispensing container, e.g., a glass orcarafe, through the cartridge container 205 configured to fit into theopening of the dispensing container (e.g., the neck of a glass orcarafe). In other embodiments, the cartridge container 205 can be partof or incorporated into an aeration device.

In some embodiments, the cartridge container 205 include an input cap230 and output cap 232 (e.g., a detachable cap) that can hold the screen215 (or a replacement screen 215 in some embodiments). In someembodiments, the cartridge container 205 includes ribs 235 (e.g.,flexible ribs) that protrude (e.g., about 1 mm) from the cartridge wall240 to facilitate a liquid tight seal with the neck of the storagebottle or dispensing container that the cartridge container 205 isconfigured to fit into. In some embodiments, the cartridge wall 240 iscylindrically shaped and has an outer diameter 242 of about 17 mm andinner diameter 245 of about 15 mm. In some embodiments the cartridgecontainer 205 has a long axis length 247 of about 60 mm.

For instance, as illustrated in FIG. 3, the apparatus 200 can have acontainer 205 configured as a bag (e.g., satchel). In such embodimentsall or a substantial portion (e.g., about 10 percent or more or about 50percent or more of the bag container 205, wall 240 can include thescreen 215. All or a portion of the apparatus 300 can be submerged intoa container 305 (e.g., storage bottle or dispensing container) holdingthe beverage 310. In some embodiments, the bag container 205 can furtherinclude a string 315 to facilitate recovery of the apparatus out of thecontainer 305.

Another embodiment is a beverage, such as wine or any of the otheridentified beverages. The beverage is substantially free of noxiousconstituents. The beverage is treated by any one or more of theembodiments of the method 100, and/or, using one or more embodiments ofthe apparatus 200 discussed in the context of FIGS. 1-3.

For example in some embodiments the beverage comprises or is a treatedvolume of a liquid alcoholic beverage (e.g., wines, beers or sprits)that has been exposed to an ion exchange matrix that includes a mixtureof cation exchange beads and anion exchange beads capable of binding oneor more noxious ionic constituents present in the beverage. The noxiousionic constituents (e.g., one or both of sulfites or histamine) can bereduced by at least about 25 percent compared to an untreated volume ofthe beverage.

The noxious constituents include total sulfite concentrations of about300 ppm or less, and/or, total histamine concentrations of about 30 ppmor less. In some embodiments, sulfite concentrations are about 300 ppmor less and total histamine concentration is about of about 30 ppm orless. In some embodiments of the beverage have a total sulfiteconcentrations of about 50 ppm or less and/or histamine concentration ofabout 10 ppm or less. In some embodiments of the treated alcoholicbeverage, the noxious constituents additionally or alternatively includea total tyramine concentration of about 10 ppm or less. In someembodiments of the treated alcoholic beverage, the noxious constituentsadditionally or alternatively include a total tannins concentration ofabout 2000 ppm or less.

Some embodiments of the treated beverage, alternatively, or in somecases additionally, include one or more anti-allergenic ingredientsincluding anti-histamines and/or vasoconstrictors. In some embodiments,the anti-allergenic ingredient can include ephedra in a concentration ofabout 100 ppm or higher. In some embodiments, the anti-allergenicingredient can include caffeine in a concentration of about 400 ppm orhigher. In some embodiments, the anti-allergenic ingredient can includequercetin in a concentration of about 500 ppm or higher. In someembodiments, the anti-allergenic ingredient can include resveratrol in aconcentration of about 500 ppm or higher. In some embodiments, theanti-allergenic ingredient can include grape seed extract grape seedextract in a concentration of about 250 ppm or higher. In someembodiments, the anti-allergenic ingredient can include pine barkextract in a concentration of about 150 ppm. In some embodiments, theanti-allergenic ingredient can include grape butterbur in aconcentration of about 100 ppm or higher.

To further illustrate various features of the disclosed method,apparatus and/or beverage, several non-limiting example treatmentprocedures are presented below.

Experiment 1

Red Wine (Wolf Blass Yellow Label Cabernet Sauvignon, Australia) wasused as purchased. Once the bottle was opened, wine was distributed intothree 200 mL glass bottles and sealed stored in fridge. A 0.02%Potassium Metabisulfite (K₂S₂O₅) solution used in this experiment wasprepared with K₂S₂O₅ salt (Sigma-Aldrich) and DI water in a volumetricflask.

Ion Exchange Experiments: In these experiments, desired amounts of Ionexchange beads (TM-9XRR, Mix Bed, H/OH) were added to 35 mL of red wineor 50 mL of 0.02% K₂S₂O₅ solutions with magnetic stirring. Typically,after 10 min of mixing, 25 mL of supernatant (without beads) wascarefully moved to a 50 mL beaker for SO₂ titration.

Free SO₂ Titration: 25 mL of sample was first placed in a beaker fortitration with medium-speed stirring. Then 2 mL of 2N HCl and 2 mL ofreactant solution were added to the beaker. SO₂ Electrode (SC-300,Vinmetrica, Calif., USA) was turned on and immersed in solution. Themixture solution was titrated with standard SO₂ titrant provided byVinmetrica. The volume of titrant consumed was measured and used tocalculate the free SO₂ in sample.

Total SO₂ Titration: 25 mL of sample was first placed in a beaker fortitration with medium speed stirring. 10 mL of 1N NaOH was added to thebeaker and stirred for 10 min. Then 8 mL of 2N HCl and 2 mL of reactantsolution were mixed with the analyte. The analyte was titrated withtitrant same as free SO₂ titration. The volume of titrant consumed wasmeasured and used to calculate the free SO₂ in sample.

Free SO₂ and total SO₂ of red wine are shown in TABLE 1. Wine is acidicand the free SO₂ value decreases with time once the bottle is opened.The repeat measurement result indicates that the titration result isrelatively accurate.

The free SO₂ results of wine treated with ion exchange beads are plottedin the FIG. 4. Mixing with ion exchange beads can lower the free SO₂value in wine samples. The estimated ion exchange capacity for winesample is about 0.13 mg SO₂/g beads.

Free SO₂ Total SO₂ Sample pH (ppm) (ppm) Day 1 3.88 29 Day 5 3.63 22 50Day 5 (repeat) 22

The free SO₂ results of wine treated with ion exchange beads are plottedin FIG. 4. Mixing with ion exchange beads can lower the free SO₂ valuein wine samples. The estimated ion exchange capacity for wine sample isabout 0.14 mg SO₂/g beads.

A 0.02% K₂S₂O₅ solution was employed as a sulphite solution to evaluatethe beads capacity towards sulphite. The results are shown in FIG. 5.The free SO₂ of solution decrease with the increase of beads added tothe solution. The estimated ion exchange capacity in 0.02% K₂S₂O₅solution is about 10.4 mg SO₂/g beads which is 100 times higher thanthat in wine sample. Thus it is suspected that there are a lot ofcompeting ions binding to ion exchange beads.

The results suggest that the free SO₂ in wine can be removed by mix bedion exchange beads. In some cases, the capacity of beads binding tosulphite in wine can be lower than that in sulphite solution, possiblydue to other ions present in wine binding to beads with sulphite ions.In some cases, the reproducibility of SO₂ titration is about ±2 ppmerror.

Experiment 2

Red Wine (Wolf Blass Yellow Label Cabernet Sauvignon, Australia) wasused as purchased. Once the bottle was opened, wine was distributed intothree 200 mL glass bottles and sealed stored in fridge.

Ion Exchange Experiments: Several methods has been used to mix ionexchange resin with wine sample, including Stir, Flowing through(funnel, column), Non-stir and Satchel Packed.

Stirred: 5 g Ion exchange beads (TM-9XRR, Mix Bed, H/OH) were added to100 mL of red wine with magnetic stirring. After desired time ofstirring, 25 mL of supernatant (without beads) was carefully moved to a50 mL beaker for SO₂ titration.

Non-stirred: 5 g ion exchange beads were added to 100 ml of red winewithout stirring. After 10 min, 25 mL of supernatant was taken for SO₂content titration.

Flowing through Funnel: 5 g of Ion exchange beads were first placed on afilter funnel (with whatman No. 1 filter paper). Then 100 mL of winewere carefully poured over the beads and let it slowly drain downthrough beads and filter paper. Filtrate was collected for further SO₂content tests. Recycle experiments were performed by using those usedbeads without washing.

Flowing through Column: 6 g of Ion exchange beads were first packed in asmall chromatograph column. 100 mL of wine was added to the top of thecolumn and flowed through the column. Recycle experiments were performedby using the same used beads in column without washing.

Stachel Packed: 5 g of ion exchange beads were first placed in a teasatchel. Tea bags were stapled at the top to avoid any loss of beads.Then tea satchel was immerged in 100 mL of wine for a desired time.

Free SO₂ Titration: 25 mL of sample was first placed in a beaker fortitration with medium-speed stirring. Then 2 mL of 2N HCl and 2 mL ofreactant solution were added to the beaker. SO₂ Electrode was turned onand immersed in solution. The mixture solution was titrated withstandard SO₂ titrant provided by Vinmetrica. The volume of titrantconsumed was measured and used to calculate the free SO₂ in sample.

Total SO₂ Titration: 25 mL of sample was first placed in a beaker fortitration with medium speed stirring. 10 mL of 1N NaOH was added to thebeaker and stirred for 10 min. Then 8 mL of 2N HCl and 2 mL of reactantsolution were mixed with the analyte. The analyte was titrated withtitrant same as free SO₂ titration. The volume of titrant consumed wasmeasured and used to calculate the free SO₂ in sample.

The effect of stirring time on SO₂ content: The influence of stirringtime on SO₂ content is shown in FIG. 6. Both free SO₂ and total SO₂content dramatically decline from 60 to 15 ppm at the first 20 min ofmixing. About 20 min is required to reach the equilibrium level.

The effect of flowing through filter funnel and chromatograph column:FIG. 7 2 shows the removal of SO₂ by flowing through a column. In thefirst cycle, about 60% of SO₂ can be removed by the ion exchange beadsin the column. The total SO₂ drops from 50 to 20 ppm. In addition, theused beads in column still show the ability to remove SO₂ in wine afterthe first cycle. After 4 times recycling, the beads still are able toremove about 30% of SO₂ in wine. Flowing through a funnel method showssimilar results as flowing through the column. However, it takes longertime for 100 mL of wine to flow through filter funnel (20 min) comparedwith the column (13 min). The filter material property might be thefactor reducing the flow rate.

The effect of removal of SO₂ by a satchel pack: FIG. 8 presents theremoval of SO₂ in wine by satchel packed beads with various soakingtime. Both free SO₂ and total SO₂ slightly decrease with 10 mintreatment. However, this process is very slow. The SO₂ content stillremains a high level even after 1 hour of soaking.

Comparison of SO₂ removal methods: The free SO₂ and total SO₂ contentsof wine treated by four different methods are shown in the FIG. 9.Satchel Packed method and Non-stir method can only remove lesser amountof SO₂ in wine. However, flow through method and stir method can removeabout 50% of total SO₂ content from 54 to 28 ppm. In addition, accordingto the SO₂ content, there was a small difference between flow throughmethod and stir method. Non-stir method works slightly better thansatchel packed method. This may due to the outer layer of satcheltextile, which forms a barrier to mass transfer. Comparing thosemethods, it can be observed that fluidic flow helps the removal of SO₂to a large extent by transporting ions close to ion exchange beads.However, the flow rate of wine flowing through the column is slower(7.69 mL/min) compared with pouring (approximately 1000 mL/min).

The results suggest that SO₂ in wine can be efficiently removed bymixing ion exchange beads with wine with stirring. In some cases, about20 min is required to reach the final equilibrium level. In some cases,compared with a stir method, the efficiency of beads to remove SO₂ willbe lower when packing beads in a satchel or simply soaking beads in winewithout stirring. In some cases, flow through shows similar result tostirring. It may indicate that the fluidic flow of wine through ionexchange beads is an important variable affecting the speed of SO₂removal. In some cases, ion exchange beads packed in column can berecycling for repeated use.

Experiment 3

SO₂ removal from wine using ion exchange resin beads A-244 XRR (Cl)(hence forth “Cl anion exchange resin”) were tested on wine samples withthe same method as described in experiments 1 and 2. The results arecompared with the results using the TM-9 XRR (H/OH mix bed; henceforth“mixed H/OH ion exchange resin”) ion exchange resin beads, such asdescribed in experiments 1 and 2.

Wine was treated with anion (Cl) exchange resins for 10 min with mediumstirring. Result of SO₂ removal are presented in FIGS. 10A and 10B usingdifferent resin amounts. The Cl Anion exchange resin shows similarability as the mixed H/OH ion exchange resin to remove both the free SO₂and total SO₂ in wine.

Tables 2 and 3 show properties of wine treated by the Cl anion exchangeresin and the mixed H/OH ion exchange resin, respectively.

TABLE 2 Ion Free Total exchange beads Time Conductivity SO2 SO2 Sample(g/100 mL) (min) pH (μS/cm) (ppm) (ppm) Wine 0 0 3.71 2500 29 37 Wine5.7 10 3.32 3260 13 19 Wine 8.6 10 3.35 3720 11 14

TABLE 3 Ion Free Total exchange beads Time Conductivity SO2 SO2 Sample(g/100 mL) (min) pH (μS/cm) (ppm) (ppm) Wine 0 0 3.58 2460 31 65 Wine1.4 10 3.49 1750 25 37 Wine 2.9 10 3.38 1360 18 28 Wine 5.7 10 3.12 56512 15 Wine 8.6 10 3.02 333 7 9

The conductivity of wine treated with the Cl anion exchange resin wasincreased from 2.5 mS/cm to 3.7 mS/cm (Table 2). The conductivity ofwine treated with the H/OH mixed bed resin decreased to 0.3 mS/cm (Table3). Possible reasons for this difference may be the introduction of Clanions by ion exchange. The pH of wine treated with the Cl anionexchange resin decreased from 3.71 to 3.35 (Table 2). The pH of winetreated with the H/OH mixed bed resin decreased from 3.58 to 3.02 (Table3).

The result suggest that the Cl anion exchange resin removes SO₂ fromwine, with the same to slightly lower rates of removal as compared tothe H/OH mixed bed resin. The conductivity of wine increases aftertreatment with the Cl anion exchange resin.

Experiment 4

The free SO₂, total SO₂, pH and conductivity of wine before and afterion exchange resin were measured and compared.

SO₂ titrant and Reactant were purchased from Vinmetrica. Red Wine (WolfBlass Yellow Label Cabernet Sauvignon, Australia) was used as purchased.Once the bottle was opened, wine was distributed into three 200 mL glassbottles and sealed stored in fridge. Potassium Metabisulfite (0.02%K₂S₂O₅) solution used in this experiment was prepared with K₂S₂O₅ salt(Sigma-Aldrich) and DI water in a volumetric flask. Mixed bed ionexchange resin (TM-9 XRR (H/OH)), Anionic ion exchange resins (A-244XRR(Cl), A-464 (Cl)) and Cationic ion exchange resin (C-211 XRR (H))were used as received from SIEMENS. A chromatography column (10 mmdiameter×135 mm height) was packed to a bead height of about 80 mm andthe wine height above resins equaled about 50 mm.

SO₂ Content Measurement:

Free SO₂ Titration: 25 mL of sample was first placed in a beaker fortitration with medium-speed stirring. Then 2 mL of 2N HCl and 2 mL ofreactant solution were added to the beaker. SO₂ Electrode was turned onand immersed in solution. The mixture solution was titrated withstandard SO₂ titrant provided by Vinmetrica. The volume of titrantconsumed was measured and used to calculate the free SO₂ in sample.

Total SO₂ Titration: 25 mL of sample was first placed in a beaker fortitration with medium speed stirring. 10 mL of 1N NaOH was added to thebeaker and stirred for 10 min. Then 8 mL of 2N HCl and 2 mL of reactantsolution were mixed with the analyte. The analyte was titrated withtitrant same as free SO₂ titration. The volume of titrant consumed wasmeasured and used to calculate the free SO₂ in sample.

Ion Exchange Experiments:

Stirring Method: In a typical experiment, 5 g of ion exchange resin wasadded to 100 mL of wine with magnetic stirring. After 10 min of mixing,25 mL of supernatant (without beads) was carefully moved to a 50 mLbeaker for SO₂ titration.

Non-Stirring Method: In these experiments, 5 g ion exchange beads wereadded to 100 ml of wine without stirring. After 10 min, 25 mL ofsupernatant was taken for SO₂ content titration.

Flowing through (Funnel) Method: 5 g of Ion Exchange beads were firstplaced on a filter funnel (with whatman No. 1 filter paper). Then 100 mLof wine were carefully poured over the beads and let it slowly draindown through beads and filter paper. Filtrate was collected for furtherSO₂ content tests. Recycle experiment were performed by using those usedbeads without washing.

Flowing through (Column) Method: 6 g of Ion exchange beads were firstpacked in a small chromatography column. 100 mL of wine was added to thetop of the column and flowed through the column. Recycle experimentswere performed by using the same used beads in column without washing.

Satchel Packed Method: In this method, 5 g of ion exchange beads werefirst placed in a tea satchel (95×70 mm). Tea bags were folded at thetop to avoid any leaking. Then tea satchel was immerged in 100 mL ofwine for a desired time.

Wine Properties:

The initial wine properties of 7 bottles of wine were measured and shownin Table 4. The measurements were conducted right after bottles wereopened. According to the results shown in Table 4, the conductivity andtotal SO₂ values vary with bottles, while the pH and free SO₂ values areless variable. The pH and free SO₂ value are two important qualitycontrol parameters for the purpose of protecting the wine during winemaking process. pH and free SO₂ are adjusted by adding sulphuric acidand sulphite depending on each fermentation batch. Thus, theconductivity and total SO₂ of each batch of wine vary with thefermentation condition.

TABLE 4 Conductivity Bottle (μS/cm) pH Free SO₂ (ppm) Total SO₂ (ppm) 13.88 29 50 2 2460 3.58 31 65 3 3860 3.68 27 60 4 2440 3.62 31 48.5 52320 3.68 30 54 6 3710 2.5 29 46 7 3560 2.49 29 51

Wine will contact with oxygen and be oxidized once opened. Theproperties of wine after opening with time were recorded (Table 5). Theinitial wine property is shown as Day 1 sample, which was freshly openedwine. Wine is acidic and the free SO₂ value decreases quickly with timeonce the bottle is opened. However, the total SO₂ value shows a slowdrop from 64 to 60 in three days.

TABLE 5 Conductivity Free SO2 Total SO2 Sample (μS/cm) pH (ppm) (ppm)Day 1 2460 3.58 31 65 Day 2 1660 3.61 24 64 Day 3 1570 3.77 24 60 Day 51650 3.63 22 50 Day 12 1700 3.69 15 49

Removal of SO₂ by Mixed Bed (H/OH) Ion Exchange Resin:

Wine samples were treated with various amounts of ion exchange resins,for various times, by adding resins into wine sample with magneticstirring for a desired time to remove the SO₂ content from wine. Thefree SO₂, total SO₂, pH and conductivity of samples before and aftertreatment were recorded and plotted. Four types of resins were used.

Stirring Method: The Effect of Resin Amount on SO₂ content.

The free SO₂ and total SO₂ contents of wine treated with mixed bed(H/OH) ion exchange beads are shown in the FIG. 11. Mixing wine with ionexchange resins can lower both the free and total SO₂ content in winesamples. The estimated ion exchange capacity for free SO₂ in wine isabout 0.14 mg SO2/g resins. However, as to total SO₂ contents in wine,it is not linear to the amount of ion exchange resins mixed with wine.When the total SO₂ level in solution is low, it requires more ionexchange resins to remove SO₂ in wine. The capacity of those resinsdrops. In addition, the conductivity and pH are shown in FIG. 11 (b).The conductivity of wine dramatically decreased from 2460 to 300 μS/cm,whereas, the wine pH slightly drops.

K₂S₂O₅ solution (0.02%) was employed as an ideal sulphite solution toevaluate the resins capacity towards sulphite. The results are shown inFIG. 12. The free SO₂ of solution decrease with the increase of resinsadded to the solution. The estimated ion exchange capacity in 0.02%K₂S₂O₅ solution is about 12.14 mg SO₂/g resins which is 100 times higherthan that in wine sample.

Stirring Method: The Effect of Mixing Time on SO₂ content.

The influence of stirring time on SO₂ content was studied and resultsare shown in FIG. 13. Both free SO₂ and total SO₂ content declined byfirst 20 min of mixing. About 20 min was required to reach theequilibrium level.

Flowing Through (Funnel & Column) Method:

Both flowing through filter funnel and chromatograph column were tried.FIG. 14 shows the removal of SO₂ by the flow through column method. FIG.14(a) shows the concentration of SO₂ and FIG. 14(b) shows theconductivity. In the first cycle, about 60% of SO₂ was removed by theion exchange resins in column. The total SO₂ dropped from 50 to 20 ppm.The used resins in column still show the ability to remove SO₂ in wineafter the 1st cycle. After 4 times recycling, those resins are stillable to remove about 30% of SO₂ in wine. The flow through funnel methodshows similar results with column method. However, it takes longer timefor 100 mL of wine to flow through filter funnel (20 min) compared withcolumn (13 min).

Satchel Packed Method:

FIG. 15 presents the removal of SO₂ in wine by soaking satchel packedresins in wine without stirring with various soaking time. Both free SO₂and total SO₂ decrease with a 10 min treatment. However, compared withstirring method and flowing through method, the decrease is slower.

Comparison of Stirring, Non-Stirring, Satchel Packed and Flow Through(Funnel & Column) Methods on SO₂ Removal:

The free SO₂ and total SO₂ contents of wine treated by four differentmethods are shown in the FIG. 16. Satchel Packed method and Non-stirmethod removes lesser amounts of SO₂ in wine as compared to flow through(funnel & column) methods. The flow through method and stir method canremove about 50% of total SO₂ content from 54 to 28 ppm. The SO₂ contentwas similar for flow through method and stir method. The non-stir methodremoved SO₂ slightly better than satchel packed method. It is thoughtthat the outer layer of satchel textile, may form a barrier to masstransfer. Comparing methods, it is thought that fluidic flow helps theremoval of SO₂ to a large extent by transporting ions close to ionexchange beads. However, the flow rate of wine flowing through column isslower (7.69 mL/min), compared with pouring (approximately 2000 mL/min).

Removal of SO₂ by Anion (Cl) Exchange Resin:

Wine was treated with anion (Cl) exchange resins for 10 min with mediumstirring. Results are shown in FIG. 17. Cl Anion exchange resin showssimilar ability as mixed bed resin to remove both the free SO₂ and totalSO₂ in wine. The conductivity of wine treated with Cl− anion exchangeresins was increased from 2.5 mS/cm up to 3.7 mS/cm (see Table 4), whilewith H/OH mixed bed resin treatment, the conductivity of wine dropped to0.3 mS/cm. The pH of wine after Cl− anion exchange resin treatmentdropped from 3.71 to 3.35.

Removal of SO₂ by Cation (H) Exchange Resin:

To investigate the mechanism of absorption of SO₂ by ion exchangeresins, cation (H) exchange resin was employed to remove SO₂ content inwine as well. With various amounts of cation exchange resin added towine, both free and total SO₂ content of wine slightly decline as shownin FIG. 18. Adding more cation exchange resins did not further removeSO₂ content in wine. The conductivity of wine increases when a largeamount of cation exchange resins are added to the system.

Comparison of Four Different Ion Exchange Resins on the Removal of SO₂from Wine:

The ability of four different ion exchange resins to remove SO₂ fromwine were compared (FIG. 19). Mixed bed (H/OH) resins presented thehighest efficiency of removing SO₂ from wine, e.g., lowering the totaland free SO₂ from 51 and 29 ppm down to 12 ppm. However, mixed bedresins can also decrease the conductivity of wine from 2.49 mS/cm to0.71 mS/cm, which might affect the wine taste. Compared with mixed bedresins, both anion (Cl) exchange resins used in this research were lessefficient. The conductivity of wine treated by anion exchange resins isincreased to around 3.1 mS/cm. Cation exchange resins showed lowerability to remove the SO₂ from wine.

The results suggest that both free and total SO₂ in wine can be removedby mix bed (H/OH) and anion (Cl) exchange resins. The conductivity ofwine treated by mixed bed resins decreased, while the conductivity ofwine treated by anion exchange resins increased. The capacity of beadsbinding to sulphite in wine was lower than that in sulphite solution,possibly because of the competition of other ions present in winebinding to beads with sulphite ions. Stirring mixing and flowing throughmethod decreased the SO₂ level in wine samples.

Experiment 5

Experiments were performed to test the ability of an embodiment of theion exchange resin, comprising a mixture on anionic beads and cationionic beads, to remove noxious constituents from wines. Samples of redwine, “Red”, (e.g., Robert Mondavi, Private Selection, Cab Sauv, 2011)and a white wine, “White” (e.g., Francis Coppola, Diamond Collection,Chardonnay, 2012) were tested. The reduction in concentrations ofnoxious constituents, including histamine and other biogenic amines,sulfites, phenolic compounds, was compared to the concentrations of thenoxious constituents in untreated same wine samples. The results shownin Table 6 presents the concentrations (ppm) of the listed noxiousconstituent for untreated wine samples (preT) and for 150 mL samples ofwine that were exposed to about 5 gm of the ion exchange resin for about15 minutes (Treat). Percentage reductions (%) in the noxious constituentare also presented.

TABLE 6 Noxious Red Constituent preT Red T % White preT White T % FreeSulfite 10 7 30 25 9 64 Total Sulfite 40 24 40 75 37 51 Histamine 4.630.64 86.2 0.25 <0.1 >60 Putrescine 22.48 3.01 86.6 3.33 0.37 88.9Cadaverine 0.69 0.1 85.5 0.42 <0.1 >76 Tyramine 1.16 0.42 63.8 <0.1 <0.1— Gallic acid 39 21 46.2 0.8 0.5 37.5 Catechin 5 3 40.0 0.4 0.2 50Epicatechin 5 5 0.0 Tannin 597 613 −2.7 14.6 12.6 13.7 Caftaric acid 9 277.8 8.7 1.4 83.9 Caffeic acid 6 3 50.0 5.1 2.1 58.8 Quercetin 21 1242.9 4.6 2 56.5 Glycosides Quercetin 4 2 50.0 Malvidin 24 21 12.5Glucosides Polymeric 37 38 −2.7 Anthocyanins Total 83 80 3.6Anthocyanins Monomeric 46 42 8.7 Anthocyanins Resveratrol 0.4 0.1 75.0(cis + trans) Astilbin 3.5 2.9 17.1 Grape 6.9 2.2 68.1 Reaction ProductQuercetin <0.1 <0.1 0 Aclycone

Experiments were performed to test the ability of an embodiment of theion exchange resin, comprising a mixture on anionic beads and cationionic beads, to remove noxious constituents from beer. The reduction inconcentrations of noxious constituents including histamine and otherbiogenic amines and sulfites was compared to the concentrations of thenoxious constituents in untreated same beer samples. The results shownin Table 7 presents the concentrations (ppm) of the listed noxiousconstituent for untreated beer samples (preT) and for 150 mL samples ofbeer that were exposed to about 5 gm of two different ion exchangeresins for about 15 minutes (T1 and T2). Percentage reductions (%) inthe noxious constituent are also presented.

TABLE 7 Beer Beer Noxious Constituent preT T1 % Beer T2 % Free Sulfite<2 <2 — <2 — Total Sulfite <5 <5 — <5 — Histamine <0.1 <0.1 — <0.1 —Putrescine 4.2 2.2 47.6 2.7 35.7 Cadaverine 0.5 0.4 20.0 0.4 20.0Tyramine 0.9 0.5 44.4 0.5 44.4

Those skilled in the pertinent arts to which this application relateswill appreciate that other and further additions, deletions,substitutions and modifications may be made to the describedembodiments.

What is claimed is:
 1. An apparatus for treating beverages, comprising:a container having an ion exchange matrix held therein, wherein: atleast part of the container includes a screen that prevents the passageof ion exchange matrix there-through and permits the passage of abeverage there-through, wherein the ion exchange matrix includes amixture of cation exchange beads and anion exchange beads, and the ionexchange matrix includes a mixture of cation exchange beads and anionexchange beads each capable of binding to one or more cationic oranionic constituents in the beverage and capable of maintaining a pH ofthe beverage within ±0.5 pH units of the beverage's pretreatment pHvalue, wherein the cationic or anionic constituents have a noxiouseffect on humans and the cation exchange beads include a cationicmineral form and the anion exchange beads include a chloride mineralform.
 2. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the container is a bag havingwalls that include the screen, the bag configured to be submerged into avolume of liquid of the beverage.
 3. The apparatus of claim 1, whereinthe container is a cartridge having an input end with an input openingand an output end with an output opening, first and second portions ofthe screen covering the input opening and the output opening,respectively.
 4. The apparatus of claim 3, wherein the first and secondscreen portions are held by an input cap and an output cap,respectively, the caps capable of being removeably attached to thecartridge.
 5. The apparatus of claim 3, wherein the mixture of cationexchange beads and the anion exchange beads are capable of maintaining aconductivity of the beverage equal to or greater than the beverage'spretreatment conductivity value.
 6. A beverage, comprising: a treatedvolume of a liquid alcoholic beverage that has been exposed to an ionexchange matrix that includes a mixture of cation exchange beads andanion exchange beads capable of binding one or more noxious ionicconstituents present in the beverage and the cation exchange beadsinclude a cationic mineral form and the anion exchange beads include achloride mineral form, wherein the treated volume of liquid has a totalsulfites concentration reduced by at least about 25 percent, or, a totalhistamines concentration reduced by at least about 25 percent ascompared to an untreated volume of the liquid alcoholic beverage and apH of the beverage is maintained within ±0.5 pH units of the beverage'spretreatment pH value.
 7. The beverage of claim 6, wherein the alcoholicbeverage is a wine that was formed in a fermentation process.
 8. Thebeverage of claim 6, wherein the alcoholic beverage is a beer that wasformed in a fermentation process.
 9. The beverage of claim 6, whereinthe total sulfites concentration in the treated volume of the liquidalcoholic beverage is about 300 ppm or less, or, the total histaminesconcentration is about 30 ppm or less.
 10. The beverage of claim 6,wherein the total sulfites concentration in the treated volume of theliquid alcoholic beverage is about 50 ppm or less and the totalhistamines concentration is about 10 ppm or less.
 11. The beverage ofclaim 6, wherein the noxious ionic constituents include a total tyramineconcentration in the treated volume of the liquid alcoholic beverageequal to about 10 ppm or less.
 12. The beverage of claim 6, wherein thenoxious ionic constituents include a total tannin concentration in thetreated volume of the liquid alcoholic beverage of equal to about 2000ppm or less.
 13. The beverage of claim 6, wherein the mixture of cationexchange beads and the anion exchange beads are capable of maintaining aconductivity of the beverage equal to or greater than the beverage'spretreatment conductivity value.